Table 1.
The Newcastle- Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale of the included studies.
| Author, year | Selection | comparability | outcome | Study quality | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gerage et al, 2019 | * | * | * | - | * | * | Good | |
| Hernandez et al, 2019 | * | * | – | * | * | Fair | ||
| Whipple et al, 2019 | * | * | – | * | * | Fair | ||
| Whipple et al, 2020 | * | * | – | * | * | Fair | ||
| Parson et al, 2016 | * | * | * | – | * | * | Good | |
| Laslovich et al, 2020 | * | * | * | * | * | * | Good | |
| Delaney et al, 2013 | * | * | * | – | * | * | Good | |
| Kulinski et al,2015 | * | * | * | * | – | * | * | Good |
| Gardner et al,2021 | * | * | * | – | * | * | Good | |
| Unkart et al, 2020 | * | * | * | – | * | * | Good | |
Table 1: The table presents the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) assessing risk of bias in 3 domains (selection, comparability, and outcome) with an overall judgment of study quality (poor, fair or good). An increased number of stars can imply decreased bias.